₦airaland Forum

Ishilove: Lol. Rationalmind, I will report you to your girlfriend

@Zikdik, I have a few people in mind so I will make some inquiries and get back to you.

Ope o!

I don show. O.P bro, I would love to believe like you do. But, i've got a couple of questions for ya'. Please do your
best to answer as logically as possible.

1. What makes your story of creationism fundamentally different from all the others that exist now, have existed before, and will exist in the future?

2. How did Noah find all of the animals and get them back to the ark? Did he bring them back one pair at a time, or did they all follow him in a line as he visited other continents to collect more animals?

3. What did the carnivores eat on the ark?

4. How did koalas get to Australia after the ark washed up on that mountain?

5. Why did your god make life that has to destroy other life, often cruelly, in order to survive?

6. If cruelty and suffering result from a 'fallen world' caused by some original sin of humans, why did your god also punish the animals for it by creating disease, pain and suffering for them too?

7. Is it just to punish all humans, including those who weren't born yet, for the sins of one? Would you punish your own younger children for the wrongs of the oldest which occurred before the others were born?

8. If humans are special creations, why do we share the traits of violence, lust, rage, tribal warfare, homosexuality, etc. with animals?

9. Why do you believe your god made only one breeding pair (Adam and Eve), instead of many? With only one breeding pair, fathers are forced to have sex with daughters, brothers with sisters, and sons with mothers, in order to propagate the species. Is this a divine endorsement for incest?

10. If all civilisations resulted from Adam and Eve, and oral traditions about the god that created them were passed down from generation to generation, why are there so many other creation stories in the world? Why didn't all civilisations keep their 'true' religion?

11. Why did your god only appear to one group of people? If it can do anything and be everywhere at once, why couldn't it be bleeped to appear to the other people of the world as well?

12. Why do you get your scientific education from people like Kent Hovind, Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron? These people have no university-level education in science, and in some cases, no university education at all. Wouldn't it be smarter to trust those who are educated, and actively researching, in the field?

13. Why has the world, including government funding, science journals, reputable newspapers, education standards, etc., moved on without you, leaving your barbaric bronze-age theories in their dust? Why have we made so much progress in our understanding after abandoning religious methodology for a scientific one?

14. Why is there at least some evidence for our scientific theories, but none at all for your creationism?

15. Why is the fossil record arranged in such a way as to suggest evolution?

16. Why are the continents shaped like they were once together, and have similar geology on what would be the common edges?

17. Why are the continents moving apart at a rate that would put them together millions of years ago?

18. If humans are special creations, why do we share the same biology, metabolic pathways, etc. with chimpanzees? Shouldn't we have been made completely differently to emphasize the point?

19. To avoid the cruelty caused by life killing other life to survive, couldn't we all have been photosynthetic organisms, using sunlight and inanimate molecules to make our energy? If you're going to say there's not enough energy in photosynthesis, why couldn't your god design a more effective photosynthetic system?

20. Why does the evidence from so many scientific disciplines, astronomy, geology, biology, physics, chemistry, all converge to suggest the Big Bang and Evolution, while at the same time pointing away from your theory?

21. Why do the mathematical models behind scientific understanding of the Universe work so well, while creationists have no mathematical models at all?

22. Does your creation model or your holy book account for things like quantum mechanics? Why doesn't it seem to contain much useful knowledge at all?

23. If your god didn't explain quantum nature for these people because they wouldn't understand, then isn't it time your god shows itself and gives us an update now that we have more understanding? Why doesn't it divinely guide some people to write an update to your current holy book? Or is it allowing us to do that through science? Is the reason we don't need an update that science is doing such a good job of answering the questions?

24. Why does the human chromosome #2 appear to have been created by the fusion of two different chimpanzee chromosomes, complete with structures which would not be necessary if it was created as a single, unified chromosome?

25. What is the Cosmic Background Radiation? The CBR is an integral part of the Big Bang model, and is in fact demanded by it. How does your creationism account for it, ie. where does it fit in your model?

26. Why are the galaxies moving apart? Were they once much closer together?

27. Why can we see objects in space that are billions of light years away?

28. What process did your god use to create life? Can you describe how it works?

29. Can you use your creation model to make any helpful predictions that might lead us to further discoveries or understanding?

30. What is one prediction that your model can make which could support your creationism to the exclusion of accepted scientific models, and what evidence can you find for it?

There goes. I would be expecting your reply asap. You know I could die and go to hell anytime soon if you don't change my convictions soon.

rationalmind: Yes, I am

Rationalmind, how many times I call you? Don't be a biblical Joseph oh.@ Ishilove, of course I am jare.

Ishilove: @op, Eyah. Pele

Thank you, my sister. It is not a small something. Abeg I dey find e-gf. If you help me see, p.m me shaparly oh. Butter go always dey your bread ni.

Slimmos: So wen u decide to marry..where are u going to wed...? And how are u goin to raise ur children

We get married legally, in court. Our children will be raised as normal people. People who donot suscribe to religious bullsh*t. People who are sane and have a relatively high iq.

OLAADEGBU: Ride on my brother. Keep the torch burning till the Daystar in their hearts appear.

You've got no response to my post? Pathetic.

Beehorn, i've got a question for you.
The normal human diploid chromosomal number is 46. The male and female gametes contain a haploid chromosomal number of 23 each. Copulation adds up the two 23's from each mating partner to form a zygote with diploid chromosomal number 46 during fertilization.
If Jesus was not born through human copulation, where did the other half of his chromosomes come from?

Beehorn: fnkz Zikdik...just go 2ru what have written up there...am coming bk l8r 2 answer ur questn.

Gone through the thread already dear. Just waiting for you to answer my previous post. Btw...send me a p.m, we gotta talk privately (no unholy intentions, hehehe)

This is some difficult topic to follow.

chinziaski: Give me some facts you disbelieve about the existence of God. Let's play...

Seriously? I do not believe the existence of God because there is no reason to do so. If you claim you do, it's left to you to prove it. Still waiting for your evidences, as it were.

...

This one is strong!

chinziaski: Atheism is a very old belief. People saying there is no God have reasons why they say so, but that doesn't remove the fact that there is a God. In my own way, I can prove that there is a God and atheists should better believe it. If you need answers, I can give through logical reasoning supporting my answers.

I need 'em.

I don show!
Errm...owk. O.P sis, if there is a shred of empirical evidence for the existence of God, I wouldn't even have the need to believe it exists. What can be asserted without
evidence can be dismissed
without evidence. But maybe you can convince me, at least, for the sake of that ya' fine profile pinshure. So, any logical evidence to support your claims?
Bet Nne, seriously, you are not looking bad oh.

Live a good life. If
there are gods and they are
just, then they will not care
how devout you have been,
but will welcome you based
on the virtues you have lived
by. If there are gods, but
unjust, then you should not
want to worship them. If
there are no gods, then you
will be gone, but will have
lived a noble life that will live
on in the memories of your
loved ones.
-Marcus Aurelius

davadu6: OUTCOME OF TODAY'S EKSU SENATE MEETING:
RESUMPTION 6TH OF JANUARY FOR ALL
STUDENTS, WHILE NEWLY ADMTED 100LEVEL
WIL BE MERGED WITH OLD 100LEVEL STUDENTS
AND THEY'L START SESSION AFRESH BUT
200LEVEL TO 500LEVEL STUDENTS WILL
CONTINUE WITH THE SESSION 2012/2013,
HOPEFULLY SCHOOL WILL FINISH SESSION FOR
ALL BY AUGUST!!!!!!!!! NEW SESSION 2014/2015
WIL HOPEFULLY START BY OCT 2014 FOR
ALL!!!!!!

Expensive joke bro. I haven't had the oppourtunity to pay my acceptance & school fees yet.

Though the number of
nonbelievers in this country is on
the rise, many people are still
unclear as to what "atheism"
truly means. Recently, I've
encountered individuals on a
wide variety of sites who insist
they "know" certain things about
atheists, from our supposed
megalomania to our penchant
for being brutal dictators. These
assertions are often wildly
inaccurate. Here are a few things
to remember about the
freethinkers in your life.
1. Atheism is not a philosophy.
In fact, atheism is the result of a
philosophy. It describes the view
that there is simply no evidence
for supernatural forces,
imaginary friends, gods, or
otherwise. Skepticism is the tool,
atheism is the consequence.
Atheists are not motivated by
atheism, they are motivated by a
dedication to reason. Thus, the
argument "But X,Y, and Z terrible
dictators were atheists, therefore
atheists are evil!" misses the core
idea: Atheism tells no one to do
anything. Unlike religious texts,
which describe methods of
worship (keep the Sabbath,
mutilate your genitals, spread
your beliefs with a sword, etc.),
skepticism gives no normative
instruction.
Sam Harris sums it up quite
beautifully:
“Atheism is not a philosophy; it is
not even a view of the world; it is
simply an admission of the
obvious. In fact, 'atheism' is a
term that should not even exist.
No one needs to identify himself
as a 'non-astrologer' or a 'non-
alchemist.' We do not have
words for people who doubt
that Elvis is still alive or that aliens
have traversed the galaxy only to
molest ranchers and cattle.
Atheism is nothing more than
the noises reasonable people
make in the presence of
unjustified religious beliefs.”
2. "Atheist" does not mean
"amoral."
Atheists are frequently derided
as amoral, presumably because
many assume humans are
incapable of being good without
god. Recently, the Catholic Church
made sure to remind atheists
that we'll all wind up in hell. (at least we'll be in good
company.) However, to most
atheists, morality exists outside
of — and indeed predates —
religion. This means we believe
humans to be fundamentally
capable of conscientious, ethical
behavior without an oppressive
authority or fear of eternal
torment to keep us in line.
This belief in the fundamental
capability of humans to live good
lives leads many atheists to
humanism.
3. Atheism is nondogmatic.
Image
If Cthulhu, Mohammed, or Thor
show up tomorrow, atheistic
ideas will be subject to revision
and evaluation, just like any other
rationally-derived conclusion.
Atheists, as skeptics, will
challenge and update their
theories as their body of
knowledge grows. This
willingness to revisit accepted
theory is a fundamental aspect of
science.
Historically, the heliocentric
model deposed the geocentric
model, phlogiston theory was
replaced by oxidation, and the
caloric was replaced by the
mechanical theory of heat. The
distinction cannot be
emphasized enough: Science
corrects itself when it is wrong,
and gains explanatory power in
the process. Scripture, on the
other hand, remains static, as its
authority draws in part from its
immutability.
4. Atheism does not have all the
answers.
When skeptics point out the
flaws in religious creation
stories, we are often met with
the response that we have no
better explanation. But this is a
fundamentally flawed argument.
Atheism doesn't require that you
have alternate explanations to
existing religious beliefs.
You don't have to be sure about
the Big Bang, the origin of life, or
the existence of intelligent aliens
to reject the idea of a seven-day
creation story, reanimation of the
dead, or talking snakes. Quite
simply, the lack of an alternative
explanation does not make the
religious explanation any more
likely.
The certainty of many religions
answers to life's greatest
questions is what can makes
religion so psychologically
appealing. Our brains are wired
to crave certainty. Thus there is a
real biological cause for the fact
that we are more comfortable
when we are sure about a given
subject. It may be less cognitively
pleasing to maintain a position
of indecision, but an honest
assessment of the situation is
preferable to the fantastical
guesses of world religions.

To add to Platteon's words, if your God is omnipotent, why won't he just say the word and vanquish Satan?
It sounds like God need a storyline. The same way a superhero won't vanquish his nemesis until the end of the movie. Too bad, there's gonna be a whole lot of bloodshed in and betwixt your God's not-so-interesing action series.
P.S: Do tell God to send a renewed testament that is less Jewish and more African, containing the lifeworks of peeps like Madiba. Also, open letters by certain Nigerian politicians would be welcome. Just remember to also tell him that this time we don't need four different inspired version...its errr, kinda confusing

kambo: The bible says "with the heart man believeth" . Babies believe in God but wen their reasong "mind" developed they become susceptible to doubtg His exstence.

Babies believe in God? Now, this is some "scientifi-biblio-kambolic" discovery ish.

A creator-god is never
portrayed as something simple
or, more importantly, something
simpler than the universe. If this
god is at least as complex as the
universe, then it needs a
designer and creator at least as
much as the universe.
Theists usually respond
with one of a couple of common
objections. The first is to claim
that this creator-god has always
existed while the universe has
not; because the universe began
to exist at some point, it requires
a creator in a way that the god
does not. Unfortunately, the
assertion that this god always
existed is unsupported and
apparently unsupportable — it’s
just an assertion we have no
particular reason to believe. The
assertion that the universe
“began” to exist is also
problematic because time itself is
a feature of the universe, and
therefore the universe does not
exist “in” time such that we can
talk about a time “before the
universe” or a time “after the
universe.”
Another objection raised by theists is the idea that their
god is a “necessary being” and
doesn’t need a “creator.”
Unfortunately, this is also
unsupported and unsupportable.
There is no basis for such an
arbitrary assertion, except to try
to excuse their god from the
same standards they wish to
apply to the universe.
Moreover, both of the above
excuses made for this god can
be equally work for the universe.
Why can’t the universe be
“necessary” or not need a
“creator?” Why can’t we say that
the universe has “always”
existed because there is no
identifiable point in time when
the universe did not exist? No
one can say — after all, we really
don’t know enough about our
universe or universes in general
to make such judgments. Of
course, we also don’t have
enough verifiable data of gods to
make such judgments about
them, either.
Another possible objection, also
ad hoc in nature because it is
only brought up in order to
explain away this argument, is
the idea that the “complexity”
being discussed only applies to
material things. God, being
immaterial, is not subject to the
same standards. This objection
falters, however, because the
same people offering it also
typically believe in immaterial
souls, thus leading to the
unorthodox belief of our souls
existing in parallel with this god
rather than being creations of
this god. Although someone
could hold such a belief, it isn’t
one you will likely encounter; as a
result, it is unlikely that this
objection can be used
consistently or successfully with
the person’s beliefs.
So, your argument is quite baseless and another illogical attempt to prove the existence of a man-made entity. Unless of course, you have logical or scientific evidence to support your claims of an uncaused God.

Every so often when I am
discussing or debating religion
with someone, he or she will tell
me that at one time they were
once an atheist just like I am
now. I even had one person call
himself an “ex-atheist.” I always
found this kind of odd
considering that all Christians
(and even all theists for that
matter) are by definition “ex-
atheists.”
What most Christians don’t
realize is that we are born
without belief in a deity... any
deity. Babies don’t believe in
deities and religions because
they are babies. Their minds have
not yet developed and they can’t
even recognize themselves in a
mirror. They don’t believe in
ghosts or tarot, nor do they
believe in the boogieman, Santa
Claus, or Gods. They are a blank
slate as far as complex beliefs go.
All babies have are instincts and
the nurture of the womb. In
other words, people are born
without the belief in deities. We
are all born atheists.
However, religious indoctrination
starts very early on in most
families and so by the time a
baby can express any kind of
thoughts at all, they have
probably already been
brainwashed to believe in a deity
and/or in some sort of religion.
This is a sad fact about religious
institutions that they can’t even
wait until someone has reached
the age of reason to start
warping young and fragile minds
with indoctrination.
So why do some Christians pull
out the “ex-atheist” card? Well,
one technique in the art of
persuasion is to identify with
your subject. In this case, a
Christian claims to identify with
his or her mark by claiming that
they once didn’t believe in God
and the Bible. The problem with
this is that a simple lack of belief
is all that qualifies one as an
atheist. In other words, a person
who has never thought about
religion is just as much of an
atheist as someone who has
studied the claims of Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam and has
researched the Torah, Bible, and
Koran and found that those
belief systems are ridiculous.
Kirk Cameron of Growing Pains
fame is one such person who
frequently uses the “ex-atheist”
card. But I doubt very much that
Kirk Cameron cared about
religion at all before becoming
religious. He almost certainly
didn’t study the claims of religion
with any seriousness or rigor
nor did he look at the history of
Christianity and the Bible before
becoming a fundamentalist
Christian. He probably never
argued with religious believers
and probably never thought
about any of the philosophical
arguments. Yet he still can claim
honestly that he was once an
atheist.
On the other hand, many atheist
activists (i.e. atheists who have
actually studied religion and still
don’t believe) were once
religious. Many were even very
religious and some were even
fundamentalists. These particular
atheists are often very
knowledgeable about their
particular religious sect and so
when they de-convert it really
means something. In other
words, the claim of ex-Christian
may actually carries philosophical
weight while the claim of ex-
atheist is usually pretty much just
meaningless. I know many
Christians will claim this is a
double standard. But the reason
for this double standard is a valid
one and so the ex-atheist
Christians really have no
persuasive ground to stand one.
So when discussing religion with
someone who throws out the
“ex-atheist” card, it is important
to ask them about their former
atheism. How knowledgeable of
an atheist were they? Did they
read and understand the
counter-arguments to religious
belief? Did they debate or discuss
religion with believers when they
were a non-believer? What’s their
“street cred” so to speak?
So the real question here is- were you ever truly an atheist?
P.S: This one is dedicated to the "Bolainos" of this world.

girl king: I personally want an open minded man and so far it has been hard to find

Have you tried err..me?

.

delikay4luv: yes

Okay, thanks. So what are the requirements for the screening exercise, in terms of credenitials, e.t.c?

Can one be screened without paying the tuition fees yet?

Eminado01: ^^exactly. Like attracts likes... Not every woman wants a freaking god-fearing man, sheessshh

Honestly? How many female atheists have you met around here?

I've just been thinking. Almost every lady wants a god-fearing man for a spouse or partner, as it were. What is the lot of atheists here? Does this mean we won't have girlfriends or get married?
Babes, make una consider us oh. We're good people, honestly. I've just been thinking. Almost every lady wants a god-fearing man for a spouse or partner, as it were. What is the lot of atheists here? Does this mean we won't have girlfriends or get married?
Babes, make una consider us oh. We're good people, honestly.

This one is strong. OP, I know babes like this. Unless you are the patient type that is ready to break her defences with time, you'ld get bored oh.

Anuoluwap: don't u know about admission checker? The pin you pay 1k for to check ur admission status on eksu website

Would I be screen without payment of my tuition fees yet?

ultra buzie: Top of the morning to you all nairalanders.
Please what am i required to bring along for the screening, please i need an answer asap!
Am also in search of a female roomate..........

Why not male?

ultra buzie: Top of the morning to you all nairalanders.
Please what am i required to bring along for the screening, please i need an answer asap!
Am also in search of a female roomate..........

Why not male?

cutierashy: Mornin peeps

Morning.

Hey, this wasn't meant to be so violent nah.